Increasing the Acceptance of Soy-Based Foods *

Brian Wansink, Ph.D. Steven Sonka, Ph.D.

Peter Goldsmith, Ph.D. Jorge Chiriboga

Nilgün Eren

December 4, 2003

* * All authors are at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Brian Wansink is Professor of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, of Marketing, and of Nutritional Science. Steven Sonka is the Emeritus Chair of Soybean Strategy and Assistant Dean for the Office of Research at the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences. Peter Goldsmith is the National Soybean Research Laboratory Endowed Fellow in Agricultural Strategy. Jorge Chiriboga and Nilgun Eren are graduate students. Please direct correspondence to Professor Brian Wansink, 350 Wohlers Hall, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820, 217-244-0208, wansink@uiuc.edu. The authors would like to thank the Illinois Council for Agricultural Research and the National Soybean Research Lab and the Illinois Soybean Program Operating Board for their support of this project.

The published version of this working paper is: Wansink, Brian, Steven Sonka, Peter Goldsmith, Jorge Chiriboga, and Nilgün Eren (2005), “Increasing the Acceptance of Soy-Based Foods,” Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing¨, 17:1, 33-35

2

Increasing the Acceptance of Soy-Based Foods

Abstract:

Programs intending to encourage the adoption of soy-based foods have fallen short of expectations. This issue of how unfamiliar, protein-rich foods can be introduced into diets was addressed during the rationing years of World War II when citizens were encouraged to incorporate protein-rich organ meats into their protein deficient diets. Unfortunately, most of the insights resulting from these efforts remained unpublished or in limited distribution. This article takes these recently released findings and uses them to show how the acceptance of soy-based foods can be facilitated.

Increasing the Acceptance of Soy-Based Foods

Many programs and campaigns to change eating habits have met with costly,

disappointing, short-term results (Eldridge et al., 1998). Most recently, even the adoption

of soy-foods has been slow because consumers are wary to try unfamiliar, initially

unappealing foods (Shork, 2000). How then can soy-foods be incorporated into

mainstream diets and into long term eating patterns? A recently declassified set of

studies regarding food consumption behavior in the 1940s reveals some interesting

information that addresses this important question.

In the years just before and after the United States involvement in World War II,

much domestic meat was being shipped overseas to feed soldiers and allies. As a result,

there was a growing concern that a lengthy war would leave the United States protein

starved unless a substitute could be found (Guthe and Mead, 1943). The challenge was

how to encourage depression era Americans to incorporate substitutes, such as variety

meat (intestines, stomach, liver, etc.) into their daily diets (Raub, 1943). Currently, there

are several studies that intend to assess some possible substitutes for traditional foods that

are healthier than traditional foods. For example, there was a study carried out in

Guatemala about the nutritional effects of Incaparina, a fortified food that was first

introduced to Guatemala in the 1960’s (Barenbaum, et al., 2001). Conversely, this article

uses some key insights learned in the World War II studies to present some important

approaches that can be followed in order to induce consumers to introduce soy-based

foodsi into their diets.

4

BACKGROUND

In the 1940’s, the need to study the food consumption patterns of society based on the

consumption patterns of each household was established. In fact, it is important to

analyze the different roles that each family member plays at the moment of purchasing

food (Lewin, 1943). Depending on the situation, family members can act as advisers,

information providers and sometimes deciders.

The Critical Role of the Gatekeeper

In order to further understand why many households do not tend to purchase soy

foods, it is important to first recognize who are the individuals with the primary say in the

purchase. The deciders in a household are defined as the gatekeepers because they are the

ones that guard which food products reach the household and which stay at the shelves of

super market stores and food markets. Generally, they are in charge of cooking and

therefore, they decide what food is necessary (Lewin, 1943).

Traditionally, the role of gatekeeper has been delegated to women. However, in the

past decades this trend has changed slightly due to the increasing role of women in the

working population. As a result, there is a new trend starting, where children and young

teenagers are assuming the role of gatekeepers (Wansink, 2003a). This has an important

impact on the way companies and agencies should promote soy because teenagers are

generally exposed and better influenced by TV or radio advertisements. In addition,

children are also the primary influencers of the purchase decision because they tend to be

attuned to consumer issues, as they enjoy more discretionary time. Therefore, it is

5

beneficial to understand what are the most optimal ways to approach this segment of the

population in order to induce acceptability of soy foods.

Conventional Perceptions of Soy Foods

Currently, soy is not readily accepted in households because it is perceived as a

product with displeasing taste (Cook, 1999). This is the result of early attempts of food

companies to produce soy-based products more than a decade ago. These premature soy-

based products were rare, had an awful taste, and carried a negative connotation until just

recently (Wansink et al., 2000; Wansink, 2003b).

People form cognitive maps in their minds that allow them to understand the world

that around them. These cognitive maps should not be seen as a photograph of the reality

that surrounds individuals, but as projection of their imagination. Moreover, these

cognitive maps are affected by different factors, for instance, preconceived expectations

or the individual’s past experience. Therefore, a previous failure of soy companies to

meet the desired taste standards is very likely to have affected the way consumers

perceive soy presently. This is the reason why researchers assert that there is enough

evidence to state that consumers nowadays perceive soy as having bad taste due to a

learned behavior (Wansink, 2003b).

As seen, consumers tend to have a negative perception about soy-based products.

This is deemed to change for three fundamental reasons. First, as technology develops,

food companies are better able to manufacture soy-based products with improved taste.

Second, Second, increasing number of health conscious consumers and vegetarians

include soy foods as part of their daily diet (Berry 1998). Finally just recently, the FDA

6

now allows food manufacturers to promote the health benefits of soy to consumers.

According to the FDA, foods containing at least 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving

will be allowed to make the health claim that “Diets low in saturated fat and cholesterol

that include 25 grams of protein a day may reduce the risk of heart disease” (Hall, 1999).

This regulation opens new ways to reach consumers and induce soy food consumption

(Berry, 1998).

Changing Consumer Perceptions of Soy

One method used to influence consumers to discontinue the use of a product is by

providing fresh and new information that changes the status quo. New information

concerning the health benefits of soy-based products may cause consumers to reevaluate

those traditional products that lack these health benefits. This is called an interrupt

because it causes the consumer to interrupt their usual behavior. As a result of the new

FDA regulations concerning soy, it is possible to disclose important information about

the health and nutritional benefits of soy and therefore, to induce consumers to rethink

their purchase decision.

Even though an interrupt may cause consumers to reconsider their consumer habits, it

does not necessarily mean that consumers will modify their purchasing behavior. It only

implies that consumers will reconsider their beliefs and attitudes towards traditional

foods such as meat, milk or eggs. However, there is an opportunity to capitalize on this

situation by promoting the health benefits of eating soy-based products.

As discussed previously, consumers are concerned with the taste of soy-based food

due to past history of products that did not satisfy their expectations (Wansink, 2003b).

7

Thus, consumers form preconceived ideas in their minds of what they would normally

expect of any food product in general, for example good taste. The problem then appears

when consumers try to fulfill those needs such as good taste and appearance and the

product does not deliver up to expectations. With respect to soy foods, consumers may

find that the taste of current soy-based products does not meet existing needs or

expectations. “The lower the level of satisfaction of a given need, the wider the range of

possible consummatory actions that exist” (Lewin, 1943).

In general terms, consumers purchase a particular product because there are specific

motivators in that product that are an incentive to finalize the purchase. A motivator is

defined as a benefit that differentiates one product from the other. In the case of soy-

based products, for example, a motivator can be the health benefits attained from its

consumption. It is important to promote this type of motivators in order to de-emphasize

the perceived inability of it to satisfy other motivators, such as taste.

Another problem arising from soy-based products is that people tend to weight their

purchase decision more on those attributes that render happiness and pleasure (Dhar and

Wertenbroch, 2000). Furthermore, “it can be said with some certainty that the emotional

and dormant motives often take precedence over the rational and conscious motives”

(Wansink and Park, 2004). In another words, consumers will tend to purchase red meat

instead of a soy substitute for meat because of its good taste, regardless of the nutritional

benefits of soy. In the same way, consumers like the brand Gardenburger because it has a

chewy taste and it looks and feels like a regular hamburger (Norman, 1994). The hedonic

benefits provided by these hedonic foods provide more experiential consumption, fun

pleasure and excitement (Wansink and Westgren, 2004). Hedonic benefits are often

8

sought more in developed nations (Wansink and Cheong, 2002; Wansink et al., 2002),,

and it is possible to transform the rational motives for eating soy (health benefits or cost),

into more hedonic or rational motives such as feeling more energetic due to a healthy

diet. By applying certain motivational forces, we may be able to influence change,

depending on the flexibility of the individual (Wansink, 2002).

One method that can be used to position rational motives as emotional motives is

called modelling. Modelling takes place when an actor shows the negative consequences

of a given action to consumers. The actor then, acts as a model. For example, an

advertising agency that wants to promote soy food consumption could create a slice of

life ad where the protagonist displays heart pain due to excessive consumption of red

meat, ice cream or fried foods in general. The protagonist could also act out a great

mood as a result of eating soy-based products such as tofu or soy ice cream. In this way,

rational motives linked to health and nutritional benefits can derive emotional

attachments (Wansink and Chan, 2001). Consumers respond more readily to these types

of motives due to their hedonistic orientation.

FIVE APPROACHES TO INCREASE THE CONSUMPTION OF SOY PRODUCTS

As noted in the previous section, traditionally consumers have had negative attitudes

in relation to soy-based products and these attitudes prove to be a constraint to their

purchase decision (Wansink and Park, 2002). It is the goal of soy companies to change

these beliefs by repositioning soy foods in the mind of consumers (Wansink, 2003c). In

9

the 1940’s, several studies were carried out, to determine an effective government

strategy to induce American families to eat variety meat during periods of food rationing.

Five approaches were developed to encourage consumers to try foods that they wouldn’t

normally consume on a regular basis (Marrow, 1969). This article will analyze each

approach separately to offer the reader a broader understanding of the psychology behind

each approach.

Increasing Food Availability to Achieve Consumer Awareness

The first approachs concern food availability and accessibility. As the impact of

World War II rationing was becoming more pervasive, organ meat availability increased

at the butcher shop. Simply this increase in supply stimulated organ meat acceptability

among US consumers (Cummings, 1945).

• Food Availability: Increasing the availability of soy-based foods can be achieved by applying an intensive distribution policy with soy products (Table 1). The key is to make soy products widely available in a variety of retail and institutional venues1. Another way to improve availability is by placing soy-based products near their non-soy analog (counterpart); eg. placing soy-based meats beside beef meats. This not only contributes to a sense of availability, but it also creates a perception of substitutability between these two products.

• Food Accessibility: Availability of food is complemented with an effective

accessibility of food. It is important to make sure that soy-based foods are available, but they should also be accessible to consumers. Accessibility is driven by two main conditions, buying power and price (Tweeten, 1999). Since producers and retailers cannot directly influence buying power, they are left to work on the issue of price. This may be critical when a soy product’s analog is meat. Price is a dominant purchase attribute for purchasers within the meat value chain, whether the end-user is a food manufacture utilizing meat as an ingredient or a consumer looking to serve a traditional supper (Goldsmith et al, 2001). By persuading consumers to think of price as a salient attribute, and delivering a soy analog at a lowewr price it is possible to induce consumers to think twice before they purchase meat.

10

Table 1 Increasing Perception of Soy Availability and Accessibility

Initiatives to Increase Availability and Accessibility

Product • Use small packages to induce trial • Sell products in different sizes and forms to allow easy use in any recipe • Make sure the product is easy to prepare and convenient

Price • Price similar to analog products or slightly higher if targeted to health conscious consumers • Use coupons and discounts to induce trial • When analog product is priced higher, communicate this to consumers

Place • Use intensive distribution, which is selling through a variety of food retail chains. • Use selective distribution, which is placing the product in specific stores such as

health stores, specialty food stores, among others • Make agreements with prominent cafeterias and restaurants to use your product • Make agreements to distribute to school and university cafeterias to target health

conscious students Promotions • Feature the product on cooking shows

• Create new uses for soy products through recipes and meal ideas • Hold “how to” demos where cooks demonstrate ways to prepare soy products

onsite and then product samples are delivered • Arrange point of purchase displays that promote soy products and its benefits • Use free insert coupons

Increasing Substitutability to Achieve Acceptance

The second approach is to create a sense of substitutability (Lewin, 1943). Bollman

(1945) showed that consumers perception of organ meat taste was enhanced by familiar

food preparation and serving methods, along with the appearance of the meat (familiar

cuts and packaging). A more recent study revealed that in order to achieve substitutability

of products from different categories, soy foods and non-soy foods, it is important to

compare them by pointing out both similarities and differences. Furthermore, this study

revealed that advertising could change the attitude of people by outlining differences

when the two products are very similar and explaining similarities when two products are

different (Wansink, 1994). Therefore, this approach consists of two main steps; compare

1 Such as supermarkets, convenience stores, restaurants, hotels, and fast food outlets.

11

similarities to convey a notion of equivalence and contrast attributes in order to

differentiate. In another words, it is important first to show that a soy food can be

equivalent to an analog food and once, this sense of equivalence becomes salient,

describe those attributes that create differentiated soy products.

• Comparing Similarities: The first step in order to induce substitution is to

compare similarities. It is generally understood that most of soy-based foods serve as a substitute for a traditional food. Thus, it is important to create the consumer perception that soy foods are equivalent to traditional foods with regards to those attributes that are valued by consumers. For example, people drink soymilk because it renders the same nutritional elements as milk, i.e.: calcium. Therefore, people perceive soymilk as a perfect substitute for milk.

It should be noted that in order to convey this sense of substitutability in the mind of consumers, it is important to assess which product attributes must be communicated to the market, such as emphasizing the nutritional impact of soy Table 2). Soymilk then becomes a substitute for milk because it is nutritionally equivalent. By influencing consumers to perceive the nutritional composition of a food product as salient, it is possible to reshape the way they compare two products.

Along those same lines, it is also possible to focus on taste and packaging to create a sense of substitutability. For example, the brand Tofutti has a wide range of soy-based frozen desserts that look and taste identical to traditional frozen desserts. In this case, consumers perceive soy ice cream, per se, as a perfect substitute for ice cream because of its looks and its identical packaging (Norman, 1994). It is important to note that this is a useful approach only when the taste of a particular soy product is almost identical to that of the traditional food.

Tthe objective of this first step is to claim similarities between two products in order to induce cosnumers to seek variety (Wansink, 1994).

• Contrasting Differences: The second step is to induce substitutability to contrast

both products in order to differentiate. Just as with the soymilk example, companies should not only focus on those attributes that convey equivalence, but also on those attributes that mark the difference, i.e.: prevention of heart problems as a result of soy consumption. The more similar two products are perceived to be, the more their functional dissimilarities (prevention of coronary heart disease) must be emphasized (Wansink, 2004a).

Table 2 Increasing Substitutability of Soy-based Foods

12

Initiatives to Increase Substitutability

Product • Use attractive packaging similar to analog products • Use nutritional and health benefits on packaging • Position as a healthier food • Label should promote taste by displaying a picture of the product • Labeling should include brand name, ingredients, nutritional facts, best before date

and an endorsement for quality, such as a quality seal • Use different package presentations to target different market segments • Use co-branding with a well known non-soy brand

Price • Price similar to analog product • Use coupons or discounts to induce trial

Place • Place soy-based products near their non-soy counterpart in supermarkets and convenience stores

• Introduce an incentive program to motivate retailers to carry soy products Promotions • When advertising place emphasis on good taste similar to that of analog product

• Use joint promotions with a non-soy well-known brand to induce familiarity • Include a picture of the product in the advertisement and real life product

endorsements to give consumers a more vivid feeling of the product • Feature the product on a cooking show where both classic and exotic dishes will be

prepared step by step • Use reliable, well-liked and fit models or TV stars as a spokesperson for your

product

Using Alternative Frames of Reference to Enhance Preference

Interestingly enough, people are generally misguided by the frame of reference they

use in order to make a decision. The first step in making a decision is to frame the

question, such as “should I eat soy-based foods or not?” The way a problem or question

is framed can influence the choices people make (Wansink, 2004a).

When dealing with food consumption, people often find themselves in conflictive

situations because they are inflicted with opposing forces that induce them to act in

different ways under the same circumstances. These two types of forces are driving

forces and restraining forces . Driving forces are those that help people move towards a

desired state in life or to perform a desired activity. For example, consumers buy ice

cream because of its good taste. Restraining forces are those forces that motivate

13

individuals to move away from an undesired goal. For example, consumers who enjoy

red meat don’t purchase soy-based meat because of its perceived bad taste. Conflict

occurs when two opposite forces are inflicted on an individual (Lewin, 1946). For

example, conflict occurs when consumers are willing to try tofu due to its nutritional

benefits, but they keep from purchasing it because of its perceived bad taste.

Consumers face conflict with soy consumption because there is a driving force that

induces them to try soy-based foods. This force is usually presented in the form of health

and nutritional benefits for the consumer. In the same way, consumers face a restraining

force that induces them not to try soy-based foods. This force is generally presented in

the form of traditionally displeasing taste, similar in essence to the unacceptable taste of

organ meats during the early 1940’s. It is important to use advertising and promotions in

order to place a higher emphasis on those driving forces such as good nutritional value

and health (Table 3). The goal then becomes that of educating and motivating

consumers, in such a way as to enroot in them the use of health and nutritional issues as a

frame of reference that will help them decide which food to purchase in the future.

A recent study revealed that people are risk averse when a problem is posed to them

in terms of gains, but risk seeking when the problem is framed in terms of losses

(Wansink, 2004a). It is possible to capitalize on these results by framing the information

presented to consumers in a way that would suggest product trial and consumption.

Consumers perceive buying soy-based products as a decision that involves risk. In this

case, the risk consists of buying the soy-based products and eventually not liking the

product’s taste. The key is to achieve soy foods trial and acceptance by framing the

information presented to consumers in such a way, that potential losses for not

14

consuming soy are discussed. For example, Table 3 mentions advertising about the

potential heart problems from excessive cholesterol intake, instead of describing the

nutritional benefits of consuming soy. By doing this, the possible losses are emphasized

instead of the gains from consuming soy consumption and thus, working around the

perceived risk from purchasing soy-based products –bad taste.

Table 3 Changing the Frames of Reference

Initiatives to Change the Frames of Reference

Product • Use recyclable package to promote consumer goodwill • Position soy-based foods as healthier • Nutritional information should be prominently displayed with facts about lack of

cholesterol and fat highlighted • Segment product according to consumers view of food, i.e.: healthy vs. pleasure

Price • In general terms, price similar to analog products Place • Use selective distribution to target specialty stores, health stores, nutrition clubs

• Place soy foods near their non soy counterpart in supermarkets Promotions • Sponsor a governmental agency that promotes health and nutritious eating

• Place handouts, triptychs, or leaflets in health and fitness clubs • Sponsor health and nutrition agencies • Use cross-marketing with another food product that is health oriented • Use guilt factor by discussing in newspaper and magazine articles and ads the

health problems caused by fat and cholesterol

Using Group Decision to Increase Commitment

The previous section discussed among other things, the conflict that arises from

driving and restraining forces coming from within an individual. There is not only

conflict due to internal forces, but there is also conflict when the needs of the individual

conflict with the needs of the group. This is particularly important, when the individual

has a strong sense of belonging to the group. Developed nations such as the United

States or Canada tend to place higher importance on those values and needs such as love,

15

affection and sense of belonging. These values are situated at the top of the Maslow

Pyramid of Hierarchical Needs above those needs such as security and safety, which are

favored by developing nations (Seth, 1980). When an individual succumbs to the goals

of the group due to a desire of belongingness, it is said that these external forces have

induced him to act according to the status quo of the group. These forces are called

induced forces.

It is possible to actually use these induced forces in order to promote soy

consumption. The goal is to motivate a group to consume soy-based products based on a

group principle, or value. Several studies conducted during World War II showed the

influence of family and role models on food habits and acceptance of organ meat,

especially if started during childhood (Howe, 1945a, 1945b; Mead, 1945). This goal or

value could be responsible for eating a more healthy diet (Table 4). By achieving this,

the group is able to encourage these principles with new group members, thus influencing

them to try soy foods. For example, if people in a health club, generally consume soy-

based products, it will be likely that a newcomer to the club will be influenced to try

these foods. Therefore, it is important to promote soy consumption through social

groups, formal or informal.

It is important to note that group decision is more effective when it is approached as a

way to get the involvement from individuals who would usually avoid soy consumption.

A group decision method, used to change food habits, is more effective than a lecture

method (Committee on Food Habits, 1942). By getting the involvement of people in the

decision of the group, it will be more likely that these people will accept the product

more readily. The reason is that everyone in the group feels committed to the ultimate

16

decision because they were part of the decision process and share a sense of

belongingness to the group (Wansink, 2002). Then, it is possible to use a sense of

responsibility to eat healthy as the motivational factor that would direct the group to favor

soy consumption.

Table 4 below lists several initiatives that can be used to achieve group decision as a

means of increasing consumption of soy-based foods. It is important to notice the power

of induced forces on consumers purchasing decisions and how to apply this influence in

the case of soy foods.

Table 4 Increasing Consumption Through the Commitment of the Group

Initiatives to Use Group Decision to Increase Consumption

Product • Display charitable contribution in the packaging • Segment product according to family size • Use warm family images in packaging • Use cartoon characters or famous TV program stars in the packaging to evoke

familiarity and a sense of fun Price • Use discounts for consumers who purchase larger family size packages

• Use coupons and discounts temporarily during special holidays such as father’s day, or mother’s day

Place • Make agreements to sell product in health and nutrition clubs, fitness centers, social groups

Promotions • Sponsor a philanthropic event. Celebrities are good spokespersons for this type of promotion

• Set up a tent at a popular city festival where product information, as well as free samples, could be distributed to attendees.

• Sponsor school activities where children could learn more about soy and its benefits and give away samples of the product

• Donate a percentage of profits to charities that are important to that culture • Use public relations in the form of third party articles that discusses the

responsibility of eating healthy • Use advertising that depicts a happy family that eats healthy

17

Changing the Salience of Consumer Beliefs

The last approach involves changing the way consumers think about soy foods. As a

preliminary step, it is necessary to position soy foods as socially acceptable products, in

order to induce consumption. One method of achieving this is by creating consumer

perceptions of soy, as a food that renders social status.

During times of price increases, foods that are eliminated first are those, which are

socially less prominent according to society (Wansink, 2002). This demonstrates that

there are certain foods that serve as icons and symbols of the social status of a family. A

household that stops consuming red meat, per se, for reasons other than, a new vegetarian

trend in the family, is considered to have dropped from their usual social status (Lewin,

1943). Therefore, families in the medium to upper income segment of the market will

tend to continue to purchase foods such as red meat regardless of price increases.

Conversely, families in the medium to lower income segment of the market will

encounter a psychological problem if they discontinue the purchase of foods such as red

meat unless there is a less expensive substitute that renders the same status.

Companies can induce consumers to perceive soy food as having the same social

status as in that of traditional foods by pricing in a similar fashion (or even higher) or

using other cues such as an attractive packaging. Particularly, this strategy can work with

soy substitutes for meat. When less price sensitive (wealthier) consumers sense that these

substitutes are priced similarly to red meat, they would tend to position the soy

substitutes under the same status; using price as a measure of value. However, as argued

previously, it is important to note that companies can also decide to price soy-based meat

18

substitutes lower, combined with attractive packaging, to induce substitution by lower

income segments. As a matter of fact, companies can choose to price lower or price

higher in order to target different segments in the market. Both strategies can coexist if a

company decides to use separate brands as a way to effectively segment the market.

In addition, it is also possible to use other social endorsements such as modelling to

portray soy foods as foods that should be accepted readily in every family’s kitchen.

“Consumers tend to buy products with imagery that is either consistent with their positive

view of themselves, or which conveys a plausible aspirational model” (Livingston and

Livingston, 1995). Through advertising and promotions it is possible to change the

perceptions of consumers with regards to soy and position the product to be asscoaited

with good taste and high social status. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to change

the attitudes that consumers hold in relation to soy-based foods. Consumer behavior

theory establishes three strategies to modify the attitudes of consumers:

• Add a New Salient Belief: This could be achieved by focusing on those

relatively new attributes from eating soy-based foods such as the ability to have protein rich intake or to prevent heart problems. Adding utilitarian attributes such as health benefits has greater affect on the individual than new hedonistic attributes such as better taste (Dhar and Wertenbroch, 2000). It is possible to influence consumers to see this utilitarian benefit as a salient attribute in order to increase soy foods preference. It is effective to list such benefits in the packaging of the product (Table 5).

• Change the Evaluation of an Existing Belief: This implies trying to change the

current way consumers evaluate traditional foods. As explained before, consumers evaluate these foods primarily on hedonistic criteria such as taste or attractive presentation. By utilizing techniques such as modelling, marketers can redefine the way consumers evaluate food products made with soy (Wansink, 2003c; Wansink and Park, 2002). For example, a famous athlete could be hired to act and discuss the dangers of eating fried foods in a series of TV ads.

• Make an Existing Belief More Salient: It is important to enhance the salience

of an attribute and this can be achieved by promoting the benefits of eating

19

healthy and thus, inducing consumers to place this attribute as primary criteria to decide which food to purchase. This implies focusing even further on the benefits of eating healthy such as feeling energetic. By doing this, it is possible to induce consumers to place higher emphasis on motivators such as the health issues and thus, considering it as another important attribute to check when purchasing food. For example, using catchy slogans such as, “Here is to soy, here is to life!”

As seen in the Table 5, there are different methods to induce a change in the attitudes and

behavior that consumers hold with respect to soy foods (Dunker, 1939). It is important to

communicate those attributes to best position soy foods as a substitute for traditional

foods and to de-emphasize those attributes that prove detrimental to their goals.

Table 5 Changing the Salience of Consumer Beliefs

Initiatives to Change the Consumer Psychology Product • Position the soy food as a healthy food with nutritional benefits and good taste

• Use bright colors and eye catching logos in packaging • Nutritional information should be prominently displayed with facts about lack of

cholesterol and fat highlighted • Use green colors in packaging to evoke health and nature • Use golden colors in the packaging to evoke the plant of soy • Use catchy slogans such as “Here is to soy, here is to life” and “Love your family,

think soy” • Product brand name should usually contain the word soy and evoke health

Price • Use price as a symbol of social status (charge premium) for those soy foods that substitute traditional foods with such social status

Place • Use incentive programs to target restaurants and cafeterias • Place soy foods near the non-soy counterpart

Promotions • Use marketing research in the form of surveys and focus group to find out the consumer perception of soy

• Use a series of TV ads to educate and promote your product to the public • Focus on guilt-free feeling as a result of eating as much as you want and still

feeling healthy • Use consumer’s guilt factor by discussing animal rights issues or the issues of

eating unhealthy • When using advertising, use same values as your target segment, i.e.: self

fulfillment

CONCLUSION & FURTHER RESEARCH

20

Presently, consumers are more open with regards to soy-based foods due to a desire

to live healthier lives. Recent changes in the regulations of soy foods, concerning the

disclosure of health benefits to the public, have preceded a momentum in which

consumers are motivated to try new foods such as tofu, soy-based meat, or soymilk. In

order to keep up this momentum, it is important to distinguish which consumers are

gatekeepers in their household and furthermore, to be able to understand the psychology

of these consumers.

This article reviewed the findings of a study during the rationing years of World War

II in the United States. The results of this study provided five useful approaches that can

be employed to change previous connotations that people held with respect to soy.

• Increasing the Availability of Soy Foods: An increase in the availability of soy foods will assist consumers in thinking about these foods as potential substitutes for traditional foods. In addition, a greater availability of the product increases consumer awareness and stimulates a sense of curiosity to try these foods.

• Increasing Substitutability of Soy Foods: If consumers perceive soy products

as perfect substitutes for traditional foods such as red meat or ice cream, and without the counterproductive effects of such products, then they may accept these products as part of their daily diets.

• Using Alternative Frames of Reference: Changing the frames of reference that

consumers use to evaluate foods. This means to induce consumers to place higher emphasis on attributes such as health and nutrition rather than more hedonistic attributes such as taste.

• Achieving Compromise of Groups: This approach involves using group

decision as a way to reach a compromise to try soy foods. The rationale behind this is that individuals tend to more readily compromise and acquiesce if they have been part of the decision process.

• Changing the Salience of Consumer Beliefs: This last approach consists in

influencing a psychological change on people and using advertisement and

21

promotions to position soy foods as food that is “good for us” instead of “food that is good, but not good for my family.”

The declassified information from this study provided a unique opportunity to

develop five approaches used to enhance the acceptability of soy foods among

consumers. This study also opens the path to further research in this topic. For example,

researchers could take a closer look at the impact of communicating health benefits in

food labels. It would be interesting to study the effect of this information in labels and

what is the best way to present it. Specifically, it would be important to analyze the

extent of credibility of such claims on food labels. In addition, it would be interesting to

do research about the functionality of a quality certification concerning the processing of

soy foods. Can quality certification assist producers of soy foods gain credibility when

trying to communicate health and nutritional claims to each player along the supply

chain, particularly to the average consumer? Furthermore, the impact of the certification

of non genetically modified soy products would be an interesting parameter to measure in

a food safety crisis situation (Wansink, 2004b). This could be particularly useful, when

trying to promote benefits of soy to consumers.

22

Bibliography

Barenbaum, M., Pachon H., Schroeder, D.G. and E. Hurtado (2001), “Use, acceptability, and cost of Incaparina, a commercially processed food in Guatemala.” Food Nutrition Bulletin. 22:71-80.

Berry, Donna Gorski (1998), “Formulating Soy Foods,” Dairy Foods, v99n6 (June), 29,

32+. Bollman, Marion (1945), “Influence of Food Preparation Methods on Acceptance In the

Army,” Second Session: Food Preparation and Serving Methods and Their Relation to Food Habits and Nutrition. Quartermaster Food and Container Institute for the Armed Forces, Chicago, IL.

Committee on Food Habits: Kurt Lewin (1942), “A Group Test for Determining the

Anchorage Points of Food Habits”, Washington D.C. (July). Cook, Anne (1999), “Polishing the Image of Soy,” The News Gazette, section C, (May

23th). Cummings, Richard O. (1945), “Historical Influences and Regional Differences in United

States Food Habits,” Fifth Session: Regional vs. National Food Habits and Nutrition, Committee on Food Habits (mimeographed).

Dhar, Ravi and Klaus Wertenbroch (2000), “Consumer Choice Between Hedonic and

Utalitarian Goods,” Journal of Marketing Research. 37 (February), 60-71. Dunker, K (1939), “Experimental Modification of Children’s Food Preferences Through

Social Suggestion,” Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 33, 489-507. Eldridge, Alison L., Stephanie A. Smith-Warner, Leslie A. Lytle, David M. Murray

(1998), “Comparison of 3 Methods For Counting Fruits and Vegetables For Fourth-Grade Students In The Minnesota 5 A Day Power Plus Program,” Journal of The American Dietetic Association, 98(7), 777-783.

Forker, Olan and R. Wald (1993), Commodity Advertising. New York: Lexington

Books. Goldsmith, Peter D., A. Salvador, D. Knipe, and E. Kendall. “Structural Change or

Logical Incrementalism? Turbulence in the Global Meat System.” Journal of Chain and Network Science. Volume 2, Number 2. 2002: 101-115.

Goldsmith, Peter D., H. Gow, and N. Turan. “Is it Safe? Post-Market Surveillance versus

-ante Signalling.” Food Policy. Under Revision. November. 2002.

23

Guthe, Carl E. and Margaret Mead (1943), “The Problem of Changing Food Habits,” Bulletin of The National Research Council, 108 (October). Washington, DC: National Research Council and National Academy of Sciences.

Hall, Rick (1999),

http://nutrition.about.com/health/nutrition/library/weekly/aa102599.htm Howe, Paul E. (1945a), “Regional Food Habits As Related to Food Acceptance,” First

Session: The Problem of Food Acceptability. Supreme Headquarters of The Allied Expeditionary Forces.

Howe, Paul E. (1945b), “Some Food Problems of The World,” Fourth Session: Problems

In The Feeding of Army and Civilian Populations. Supreme Headquarters of The Allied Expeditionary Forces.

Kahn, Barbara E. and Robert Meyer (1991). “Consumer Multi-attribute Judgments

Under Attribute-Weight Uncertainty,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (March), 508-22.

Lewin, Kurt (1943), “Forces Behind Food Habits and Methods of Change” in The

Problem of Changing Food Habits. Bulletin of The National Research Council, 108 (October). Washington, DC: National Research Council and National Academy of Science, pp 35-65.

Lewin, Kurt (1946), “Behavior and Development as a Function of the Total Situation,”

Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers by Kurt Lewin. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.

Livingston G., and Livingston S (1995), “Making Projectives Projectable,” Quirk's

Marketing Research Review, Minneapolis. Marrow, Alfred J. (1969), The Practical Theorist: The Life and Work of Kurt Lewin.

Basic Books, Inc., New York. Mead, Margaret (1945), “Significant Aspects of Regional Food Patterns,” Fifth Session:

Regional vs. National Food Habits and Nutrition, Committee on Food Habits (mimeographed).

Meyers, Herbert M. (1998), The Marketer’s Guide to Successful Package Design,

Herbert M. Meyers, Murray J. Lubliner, Lincolnwood (Chicago), IL.: NTC Business Books.

Norman, James R. (1994), “With or Without Ketchup?” Forbes, v153n6, (March), 107. Official Journal of the European Union (2003), “Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 of the

European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 concerning the

24

traceability and labeling of genetically modified organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC”, L268/24-28, October 18, 2003.

Pennings, Joost M.E., Brian Wansink, and Matthew M.E. Meulenberg (2002), “A Note

on Modeling Consumer Reactions to a Crisis: The Case of the Madcow Disease,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19:2 (March), 91-100.

Raub, R.O. (1943), “Food Acceptability Tests In The Army,” Office of The

Quartermaster General. Washington, DC. Seth, Jagdish (1980), Cross Cultural Influences On Buyer-Seller Interaction/Negotiation

Process. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois. Shork, D. (2000), “A Matter of Taste: How SoyaWorld Captured 60% of The Dairy

Alternative Market,” Marketing (Maclean Hunter), 105-14. Spectrum Foods (2003), http://www.efoodpantry.com/nexsoy/ Tweeten, Luther (1999), “The Economics of Global Food Security,” Review of

Agricultural Economics, 21, 2, 473-488. Wansink, Brian (1994), “Advertising’s Impact on Category Substitution,” Journal of

Marketing Research, 31:4 (November), 505-515. Wansink, Brian (2002), “Changing Eating Habits on the Home Front: Lost Lessons from

World War II Research,” Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21:1 (Spring), 90-99.

Wansink, Brian (2003a), “Profiling Nutritional Gatekeepers: Three Methods for Differentiating Influential Cooks,” Food Quality and Preference, 14:4 (June), 289-297. Wansink, Brian (2003b), “Overcoming the Taste Stigma of Soy,” Journal of Food Science, forthcoming. Wansink, Brian (2003c), “How Do Front and Back Package Labels Influence Beliefs about Health Claims?” Journal of Consumer Affairs, 37:2 (December), forthcoming. Wansink, Brian (2004a), Marketing Nutrition: Soy, Functional Foods, Biotechnology, and Obesity, Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press, (forthcoming). , Wansink, Brian (2004b), “Consumer Reactions to Food Safety Crises,” Annual Review of Food and Agribusiness, forthcoming. Wansink, Brian and Nina Chan (2001), “Relation of Soy Consumption to Nutritional Knowledge,” Journal of Medicinal Foods, 4:3 (December), 147-152.

25

Wansink, Brian and JaeHak Cheong (2002), “Taste Profiles That Correlate with Soy Consumption in Developing Countries,” Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 1:6 (December), 276-278. Wansink, Brian and Junyong Kim (2001), “The Marketing Battle over GM Food: False

Assumptions About Consumer Behavior,” American Behavioral Scientist, 44 (8), April, 1405-1417.

Wansink, Brian and Se-Bum Park (2002), “Sensory Suggestiveness and Labeling: Do soy

Labels Bias Taste?” Journal of Sensory Studies, 17:5 (November), 483-491. Wansink, Brian and Se-Bum Park (2004), “Segmentation Approaches to Differentiate

Consumption Frequency from Sensory Preference,” Journal of Sensory Studies, forthcoming.

Wansink, Brian, Se-Bum Park, Steven T. Sonka, and Michelle Morganosky (2000),

“How Soy Labeling Influences Preference and Taste,” International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 3, 85-94.

Wansink, Brian, Steven T. Sonka, and Matthew M. Cheney (2002), “A Cultural Hedonic

Framework for Increasing the Consumption of Unfamiliar Foods: Soy Acceptance in Russia and Columbia,” Review of Agricultural Economics, 24:2, 353-365.

Wansink, Brian and Randall E. Westgren (2004), “Profiling Taste-Motivated Segments,” Appetite, forthcoming. i The issue of genetically modified foods, and therefore soy foods, is not covered in this article. It was not conveniently omitted, on the contrary, the topic of consumers attitude toward genetically modified (GM) foods is becoming unavoidable, in the light of successive food safety crises (Pennings et al. 2002, Goldsmith et al., 2002), particularly in the countries of the European Union who recently voted a new regulation concerning the traceability and labeling of GM organisms and food (Official Journal of the European Union, 2003). This issue has been covered in previous work by looking at the often oversimplified, incorrect assumptions made about consumers by both opponents and proponents of GM foods (Wansink and Kim, 2001). The GM issue concerns corn-based products as well, but corn products do not face the problem of consumers acceptance. The present article looks at the particular issue of soy foods acceptance (GM and non-GM) compared to other familiar foods.